Bill Schroeder's APPARENT Win: A Mandate For Clarity

[mark blazejewski]

Absent a numbers change after the recount or canvas of the votes, Bill Schroeder is Trustee-elect. I believe that he was the best candidate in the running.

Nevertheless, in his victory, the former Mayor's mandate is limited to a clarification of what he actually stated and stood for, during the recent campaigns.

To wit, based on the February 15, 2024 Bee, here is my list of issues in need of clarification:

(1) The new Trustee must tell the VOL residents how big a "fan" of Mr. Sweeney he truly is.

How about the lack of parking on West Main Street?

To what extent does Mr. Schroeder believe that the LIDA Board should make "adjustments" in order to "accommodate" Mr. Sweeney's "hardships"?

Schroeder also took aim at parking, stating that he is a fan of the work by Tom Sweeney’s company, Glassco Management, on the Lancaster Village Center Project at West Main Street, but worries about the lingering issue of low public parking as the village’s downtown continues to grow.

He hopes the Lancaster Industrial Development Agency sticks with its plan, despite recent hiccups in the project’s timeline. “Tom has put up some good buildings. He seems to have them all rented,” he said. “They should adjust for conditions. He had some hardships.”

(2) Mr. Schroeder needs to elaborate on what he considers to be "a great " climate smart "idea" for the village taxpayers.

All together, Schroeder says climate smart initiatives should be analyzed on a case-by-case basis, and implemented when it makes sense for the taxpayer, stating, “Maybe some ideas will be great for the village; some may have no bearing on the village at all.”

(3) Regarding livestreaming of VOL Board meetings, is Schroeder content with limiting the viewing audience to the Facebook membership?

He also said it’s hard to understand why, because regardless of the push online and at meetings by village residents, the village has yet to install livestreaming equipment. “I don’t know what the holdup is. Lancaster is kind of an aging community, and there’s a lot of people that would like to know what is going on, and that would be an ideal setup for them,” Schroeder said. “I would have thought this would have been done a long time ago.”

(4) Mr. Schroeder now needs to speak to, and fully and effectively pursue, this seemingly noble position...

“I’d like to see what they [the board] have been doing over the last three years,” said Schroeder, quickly adding that he intends to run for mayor, regardless of the results for the partial term as trustee. “It’s really hard to have a clue what the village board is doing. They seem to go into a lot of executive sessions, and that doesn’t seem like transparent government to me. Sometimes, there’s reasons for it, but the rules are pretty strict when it comes to executive sessions. I do know when I was mayor, we kept them [executive sessions] to a minimum.”

Reference: https://www.lancasterbee.com/articles/village-of-lancaster-to-hold-special-election/

Trustee Schroeder perhaps can start with these heretofore unanswered questions:

Mark Blazejewski
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Lancaster, New York 14086

November 13, 2023

The Honorable Mayor and Members of the Board of Trustees
Village of Lancaster
Municipal Building
Lancaster, New York 14086

Dear Madame Mayor and Honorable Trustees,

This is written in connection with concerns held by some village residents, small business owners, members of my family, and myself resulting from recently published reports which raised questions involving possible ethical issues regarding the relationship between the Lancaster Village Board and the Lancaster Community Development Corporation.

In that regard, I am requesting a very timely response to the following questions:


(1) Does the Village Board have any oversight responsibilities over the Community Development Corporation?

(2) According to a news story published in the Lancaster Bee in its October 26, 2023 edition, a Village Trustee resigned over issues relating to the CDC.

In that connection, consistent with the Board's relationship, ex-officio or otherwise, with the CDC, I am requesting a true and complete list of the names of the Secretary, Treasurer, and the Executive Director of the CDC at the time of the Trustee's resignation?

(3) It is my understanding that the Mayor, in her previous capacity as Trustee, purportedly termed an appointment to the CDC a "potential conflict of interest". I further understand that Trustee Ruda subsequently supported that exact same appointment.

In that regard, without intending to suggest any wrong doing whatsoever, will the Board please advise me what actor, if any, publicly advised, or strongly suggested, that the CDC appointment referred to herein, raised no a "conflict of interest" issue?

(4) I am given to understand that purportedly, the exact same CDC appointee referenced in three (3) above, now serves as a Member of the Village Historic Preservation Commission.

Will the Board enlighten me if there were any "conflict of interest" concerns expressed in non-privileged venues over that specific Village Historic Preservation Commission appointment?

(5) Will the Board convey to me any regulation or similar prescription, by whatever term known, specified in the CDC's Bylaws, that governs the operations of the Community Development Corporation?

(6) Will the Board kindly assert that the CDC has, for the last three years, faithfully complied with all of the New York State time mandates regarding the filing of New York State financial reports, and if so, what member of the CDC made those filings?

(7) Will the Board provide the names of each and every Director(s), if any, who resigned from the CDC during the time period commencing on April 1, 2021-November 14, 2023.

(8) Will the Board relate the names of each and every member of the Village of Lancaster Board, individuals who regularly publicly meet with, or serve, the Board in an official capacity, and each and every CDC Director, who may have publicly suggested the dissolution of the CDC?

(9) Will the Board provide me with the names of each and every member of the CDC that sits on the Village of Lancaster New York Forward Committee?

(10) Will the Board kindly provide me with the names of each and every member of the CDC who may have a personal business interest in the allocation of New York Forward funds?

Kindly respond to me by return email.

Yours very truly,

Mark Blazejewski

https://www.lancasterbee.com/articles/village-of-lancaster-to-hold-special-election/

[GroundControl]

Mark,

Your post is teeming with the very questions Trustee Schroeder IS going to face while on record and in view of all who can presently receive the "Ruda live stream" on Facebook.

As I stated, that open seat was there because the last person who served in it saw a very shady government operation going on. It will be on Mr. Schroeder to clear up that dark history and lift the veil of secrets and behind closed doors deals. By his own campaign promise to "find out what's been going" on since the last time he was Mayor.

My position is the same though. Mr. Schroder knowingly opened the door for the Sweeney/Ruda land deal and tax scheme and he is all for it. That from another of his own statements pertaining to his feelings about Mr. Sweeney.

Will the LIDA board now start feeling the pressure from Councilperson Schroeder (wife to Bill Schroeder) to abide by the Ruda/Sweeney equation to keep forking over tax dollars?

I would expect that start happening very very soon. There appears to be an unhealthy relationship being set up between the TOL and the VOL and a lot of conflict of interest issues that will arise from that.


It's going to be a HOT SEAT to fill. The Sweeney impact is out in the open to see.

[mark blazejewski]

Will the LIDA board now start feeling the pressure from Councilperson Schroeder (wife to Bill Schroeder) to abide by the Ruda/Sweeney equation to keep forking over tax dollars?

I would expect that start happening very very soon. There appears to be an unhealthy relationship being set up between the TOL and the VOL and a lot of conflict of interest issues that will arise from that.

A majority of Lancaster voters, myself included, in large measure supported the sitting members of the Town Board for the purpose of a directional change. The philosophical composition of the LIDA Board is an important component to that change.

GC, many Lancaster voters will see any attempt by a rogue member of the Town Council to reverse that new direction, as an act of overt disrespect for their expressed mandate.

[Lee Chowaniec]

Mark,

Your post is teeming with the very questions Trustee Schroeder IS going to face while on record and in view of all who can presently receive the "Ruda live stream" on Facebook.

As I stated, that open seat was there because the last person who served in it saw a very shady government operation going on. It will be on Mr. Schroeder to clear up that dark history and lift the veil of secrets and behind closed doors deals. By his own campaign promise to "find out what's been going" on since the last time he was Mayor.

My position is the same though. Mr. Schroder knowingly opened the door for the Sweeney/Ruda land deal and tax scheme and he is all for it. That from another of his own statements pertaining to his feelings about Mr. Sweeney.

Will the LIDA board now start feeling the pressure from Councilperson Schroeder (wife to Bill Schroeder) to abide by the Ruda/Sweeney equation to keep forking over tax dollars?

I would expect that start happening very very soon. There appears to be an unhealthy relationship being set up between the TOL and the VOL and a lot of conflict of interest issues that will arise from that.


It's going to be a HOT SEAT to fill. The Sweeney impact is out in the open to see.

Spot on!

Me also thinks Mr. Schroeder will have a lot of explaining to do concerning his involvement with Sweeny and his land acquisition and development when he was the mayor.

Regarding concerns about any influence affecting LIDA by the Schroeder connection, one only has to listen to Tuesday morning’s LIDA meeting to wipe away any concerns about its commitment his board has to following IDA protocol / guidelines that assure the public their tax dollars will be spent responsibly and that the project will be in the community’s best interest – not developers or special interest entities.
The meeting’s livestreamed video can be viewed at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lC2et4aXxQk

Of special interest was the consideration of a project submitted by Uniland Development to construct three 15,000 sq. ft. buildings at Eastport Commerce. (35-minute mark)

Told that a public hearing could be held in May and approved at the June meeting, member Robert Leary declared that he thought projects would not be entertained until the SEQR was completed. He was informed that the public hearing could be held as a SEQR was held years prior and this was just a minor revision. They could not induce until the SEQR was completed.

Leary pursued SEQR by asking about driveway access issues he heard of. He was told a condition for approval was that Uniland cannot put driveways off of Pavement Road – an interior road would take the traffic off Eastport Drive.

Leary continued: The SEQR has to be completed; at least that’s what we agreed to. They did come before the Town Board, and did a presentation, it looks good. It doesn’t mean you met all the requirements in that development or project. You still have to go through the whole process.. We count on Code Enforcement to do their part; the engineer to take a look at it, the Planning Board looks at it and makes an advisement to the town board, and then the town board decides.

When then told by the LIDA consultant that there was a lot of work to be done yet, Leary declared: “Because a lot of these people come to the town board and say, hey, the LIDA already approved this.”

The LIDA Attorney interjected that in all approvals conditions are set that must be met or the IDA is placed on hold.

Well done, LIDA!

[GroundControl]

I agree with your premise Mark.

Should some overt pressure start to be foisted upon the sitting TOL board by one of its members for the expressed purpose of furthering her husbands political fortunes or garnering support for more tax relief for Mr. Sweeney it would go directly against the mandate handed her by the voters. A check on the vote total per candidate shows Councilperson Schroder getting the fewest of all those on the slate. Hopefully she will not mix-up her TOL duties with those of her husbands in the VOL

But I tell you, this WILL happen and that will only help the fledgling group, preparing out there in the weeds, to put all those who are joined at the hip through their political mischief in the VOL out of office in the next election.

All of the names that have shown up in my research of the Sweeney dealings are a lot of the same crew including Mr. Schroeder.
I think the two Schroeders are one and the same.

The VOL circus tent of candidates is getting empty.

[GroundControl]

Lee, I do have great faith in the present LIDA board and I expect them to hold true to their strong position as opposed to previous democrat lead Boards that gave away the bank so to speak.

It doesn't mean the pressure will stop on the LIDA members by those who would do Tom Sweeney's bidding.

Let's see who comes forward and how the board handles the final outcome. By the month of June things will be getting tight for the Glassco group and their wish to win more tax dollar funding to stay afloat.

[mark blazejewski]

All of the names that have shown up in my research of the Sweeney dealings are a lot of the same crew including Mr. Schroeder.

Bill Schroeder now has an opportunity to act not only as the decent person that he is, but to function as a true public servant who is beyond unsavory politics and self-interest, or as Lanc put it so well yesterday...

We need real people that are in it for the better of the community.

I believe that he can do this by unlocking, and publicly exposing, any and all of the permissible unspoken machinations of the dealings; justifying those that can be justified; freely and contritely admitting to those that can't be justified, aka, mistakes; and then, presenting a course correction template which would ensure full and complete transparency in the future.

(Full and complete livestreaming the VOL Board sessions to an audience beyond the limits of Facebook would go a long way towards achieving those ends.)

As I previously wrote:

Regrettably, what may be the more secretive past actions of previous Boards perhaps will never be fully revealed. Equally, I believe that it is highly unlikely that any of their perceived flawed decisions will be fully corrected, but towards future remediation, I would ask that all of the candidates strongly consider the live streaming issue within the meaning of the words of Antonio in Shakespeare's The Tempest: "What's past is prologue."

Schroeder now has a golden opportunity to positively function within the meaning of "What's past is prologue."

The VOL's optimistic assuredness and his political future are now in his own hands, so we shall see, eh?

[GroundControl]

My thoughts are moving toward the state of Mayor Ruda's political mindset. I wonder if she gets the clear message the voters sent to her and her board cronies. I wonder if Mr. Schroeder gets it.

Mayor Ruda has some really important issues coming up that will test Mr. Schroeder's sincerity about his campaign promises. The parking concerns in the business district will only get worse as more buildings are added. The two properties Mr. Sweeney was able to trade for cash are still in the hands of the Mayor as I understand. One of those properties could alleviate a lot of the parking problem. The Mayor is the focal point and Mr. Sweeney is in a bind of his own doing. By not really having the where with all to financially deliver what he promised he was forced into a short sighted bad choice. Now he can't deliver the parking he originally promised and planned for. But he cannot at the moment afford to buy it back. But even more concerning is the Mayor will not give that property back and relieve a very big problem.

The priced down original land sale which delivered a ridiculously low profit point to the VOL and was used to trade cash back and forth has become a behind the scenes bone of contention between the Mayor and Mr. Sweeney.

When Mr. Schroeder starts to find out "what this board has been doing" maybe he can explain why the lot that is planted in grass near the round about on North Aurora and West Main is not been paved as a parking lot as first planned.

The Mayor kept silent as a church mouse when the parking problem was brought up at a very recent VOL board meeting. The rest of the board either know and kept silent or some of them have been kept in the dark on purpose by the Mayor. That indeed was one of the reasons a sitting Trustee resigned. Can Schroeder get some answers.

Real Live streaming access first..........

Parking or Green Space?

Just more questions for Mayor Ruda and Trustee Schroeder.

[mark blazejewski]

When Mr. Schroeder starts to find out "what this board has been doing" maybe he can explain why the lot that is planted in grass near the round about on North Aurora and West Main is not been paved as a parking lot as first planned.

This very well could be an early, exploitable flashpoint topic for Trustee Schroeder.